#gender trinary
Text
*Kurtis Conner voice* Folks! 👏
I have a gender-related question.
What gender quality exists in the dead-center of this graphic? Right in the center of the trinary? I saw something that said it's agender, but that's a lack of gender identity and I don't think it should be consider as "in between" all the other gender qualities, you know?
So what is in between masculine, feminine, and neutral? Is there a word for it at all? Not outside of or a combination of, but in between. I'm also looking for a gender quality, not a gender.
29 notes
·
View notes
Text
trinary ✦ trine
triaspec ✦ tringender
trinary : the gender trinary. What's included under this depends, but it's usually 2 binary genders (male and female) and another gender, like neutrois/agender/androgyne. There are other sources that define it better I think.
trine (trinity) / trinarine (trinarinity / trinarity) : trinary gender quality.
triaspec : an umbrella term for anyone on the trinary spectrum. It includes all trinary genders, partial trinary genders, trinary aligned and adjacent genders, and genders which are in some way similar to / resemblant of trinity / trinarity.
tringender : an umbrella term for all genders trine / trinarine in nature.
Some trinary stuff :3
[pt: trinary]
So I know of binarine, and related terms, and I wanted to make matching trinarine terms.
Trinary, of course, was not coined by me. There's already a flag for it here. I just wanted a alt flag.
The rest I came up myself.
Like I mentioned in my midtrinary post, my understanding of trinary is like this diagram. So that's where the magenta-pink (feminine), purple (androgynous), green (neutral), and blue (masculine) come from. I also added grey, inspired by the binarine flag. I think the (dark) grey is a good way to differentiate between trinary and midtrinary (same with binary and midbinary).
I also made the stripes sideways, to kind of resemble a triangle (like the gender trinary). It's most obvious in the corners, as those are actually triangles and not just stripes.
The rest of the flags are all based off of this colour scheme.
The trine flag follows a similar format to other gender quality flags, link. I rearranged the stripes to be a gradient to the middle, and with vertical stripes to help make it more distinct.
Triaspec is like the other iaspec flags, with a off white stripe in the center, and a gradient to darker colours on the outside. Because green is the lightest colour, I chose it for the center stripe, and since the green wouldn't be as prominent anymore, I also adjusted the outer blue and pink stripes to be closer to green on the colour wheel.
Tringender has a wide middle stripe and a gradient pattern, bit like the other ingender flags (mingender, fingender, lingender). The center stripe being the darkest follows the same format I use for my other ingender flags, that's just kind of how I memorised / think works for the ingender format.
#trinary#gender trinary#trine#trinarine#triaspec#trinary spectrum#tringender#new term#pride flag#new flag#alt flag
17 notes
·
View notes
Text
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
Multitrinary Pride Flag
Multitrinary/pluritrinary (plurinary/multrinary) or multiternary/multernary (pluriternary/pluternary): experiencing multiple trinary genders; or being multigender and having at least one trinary gender.
#plurernary#multitrinary#multernary#multigender#gender trinary#aptotrinary#nonternary#nontrinary#mod ap#pride flag#mogai
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
Sorry if this is a dumb question. But how can someone be outside of the gender trinary?
I assume the gender trinary is Female/Male/Nonbinary, and Nonbinary is a umbrella term for outside of the gender binary (Female/Male) so how can you be outside of all three?
I'm not trying to judge anyone, please do use whatever labels you like! I'm just genuinely curious '^^
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
sighing and tapping on a sign that says “nonbinary and transneutral do not mean the same thing and there are nonbinary people that aren’t transneutral and transneutral people that aren’t nonbinary”
#im personally both but thats not the case for everyone!!#the curse of creating a gender trinary has caused this
47 notes
·
View notes
Text
I was going to say that the problem with talking about 18th century gender is that too many peoples understanding of gender has really just progressed from there are two genders man and woman and there is no overlap between them to there are three genders man, woman and nonbinary and there is no overlap between them. While in comparison 18th century people talk far more of people who are both men and women than they do people who are neither. But honestly this is also just a problem with talking about modern gender because far to many people just forget multigender people exist, even those who would describe themselves as allies to nonbinary people.
#this is not to say 18th century ideas of gender were perfect they sure as fuck were not#it’s just hard to get people to understand the cultural lens when they have their brain stuck in a gender trinary
28 notes
·
View notes
Text
writing beta Tim has me thinking about how betas fit into omegaverse, and what kind of stereotypes exist in omegaverse around betas...
betas as the calm, collected ones. Logical and never too much. Never ruled by their instincts, or by extension their emotions.
betas as the rock in the storm. Alphas and omegas can rely on a beta to keep their head when they would be overwhelmed, they're just so strong that way.
betas aren't natural leaders of course, but they are natural mediators. They can be relied on to remain objective, when an alpha might become aggressive or intimidating, or an omega would buckle under pressure. But betas can always keep their cool and find a compromise.
betas are neutral, nonthreatening; of course they follow the rules, and they could never be an abuser or a sexual predator, they're just not given to crimes of passion the way alphas are.
Except when they are--- it's always the quiet ones, you know?
betas are normal. Betas are always fine, always happy to help, always safe, always reliable, always just fine
anyway i'm normal about it and i want more fics about betas who also have the weird omegaverse pack instincts and scenting and nesting behaviors and amplified senses going apeshit
#omegaverse#headcanons#Just. betas as normal has always bothered me#the fact that omegaverse gives us three alternative genders is too interesting to let betas be made into some kind of boring middle class!!#it would be messy and weird with the same kind of gender politics and stereotypes reinforcing each other that#'all men do this when a woman would NEVER' statements are like#as though being a man or a woman is like being assigned a sports team in school. shirts or skins and here's why my team is better#anyway gender is a spectrum and that would be true in omegaverse too only the binary becomes the trinary and it's STILL fake as hell
31 notes
·
View notes
Note
Are cats ever assigned gib at birth? If so, what's the criteria?
Yes! But it is quite rare.
Molly and Tom are usually assigned based on kit sex, and Gibs reveal themselves over the course of their childhoods. Gib-gender is associated with wisdom and diplomacy, so arbiters of a litter are often seen as Gib.
But StarClan can make its will known; kittens with a visible difference or blessing are assigned Gib at birth. Traits that can cause a kitten to be assigned gib:
Albinism and leucism
Extra toes
Coat mutations
Differently-shaped ears, whiskers, and tails
Over time, if a mutation becomes 'normal' in the general population, it stops being seen as an indicator of gibness. A good example of this is ShadowClan's brightly colored whiskers; Blue Whisker was considered gib in her time, but her genes run through SC so deeply that it's not a sign anymore.
#better bones au#Clan culture#Since this culture has 3 genders I guess you'd call a cat that identifies with none of the above non-trinary#Like Dustpelt who's gnc
135 notes
·
View notes
Text
listen. butch/femme IS binary. that’s the whole point. binary isn’t inherently restrictive: it’s an opt-in binary, not an opt-out one. you don’t have to opt in to this binary, and outside it are a million options for fluid presentation. this isn’t remotely comparable to the society-wide, from-birth expectation that all people adhere to a specific (and ultimately unattainable) set of restrictions according to their genitals, or face violent repercussions for failing to do so, and where half of those people are seen as inherently inferior to the other. you see how this is not the same as that?
#butchfemme#like is binary code problematic??#it's not fundamentally bad for there to be two of something help me#same people who just turned the gender binary into a gender trinary but did nothing to actually dismantle the policing of gender roles#like the problem with the gender binary is not that there's two options#it would be equally bad even if there were like seven options#i mean. see: caste systems lol you people are STUPID stupid
34 notes
·
View notes
Text
A term I'd like to coin called paratrinary. This is a gender that exists outside of but very near the gender trinary. It's not masculine, feminine, or neutral but is proximal to one or more of those qualities.
Paratrinary identities can include proxvir, juxera, or neutroprox as well as many others. One may even consider their demigender identity to be paratrinary in some way.
This identity is a proximal gender and, despite the name, is not related to being paragender. The para- root word refers to being "alongside" the gender trinary.
- 💙💚
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
"Nonbinary people don't owe you androgyny" is some bs intrine nonbinary people made up to feel better about themselves while they re-binarize nonbinary spaces and make everything about boys and girls, and treat the mere idea that some nonbinary people may have a gender that's different and even dissimilar to man/boy or woman/girl as a personal offence.
We live under a binary system. Androgyny is not recognised and legitimised. What you are calling "androgyny" is soft masculinity in thin white people. It's always about masculinity and femininity. Those are the only qualities recognised by the binary system.
No one, except for 13 truscum, think nonbinary people owe them androgyny. they don't recognise either!
People don't see an androgynous or otherwise extrine-pressenting person and think "they must be nonbinary"; they keep invading the person personal space and asking intimate questions until they can "discover" the persons "true gender".
No, you aren't less nonbinary for being fem or masc. No one that matters is saying that. But a lot are extremely reactionary to the mere fact of extrine people even existing and having labels and spaces to ourselves. Your "nonbinary people don't owe you androgyny" is 90% an excuse to be a dichotomist pos.
#rant#exorsexism#people need to analyse how fatmisia informs their view on gender and presentation#Y'all also need to learn how the binary system actually work#the fact that you think androgyny is pushed onto people and neutrois/agender forms a trinary with male and female tells me you clearly don'#You can't get your framework on how exorsexism works from pre-teens that think nonbinary is synonymous with agender#Have you ever thought that maybe people who tell you you aren't nonbinary are just exorsexists who believe in an strict gender binary?#because I can assure you they don't recognise any extrine quality either
18 notes
·
View notes
Text
The Gender Trinary: Hero, Maiden, Monster
I've talked about this before, but maybe it's worth doing so in a more comprehensive fashion.
----------
I should start by saying: this is not any kind of commentary on how the world really works.
It is an exploration of a symbolic paradigm that is meaningful to me, personally. (A paradigm that was, to be sure, more meaningful to me when I was younger and angstier and less-well-integrated into my life. But still meaningful.) It tells you far more about my own neuroses than it does about any external reality.
I have found it noteworthy, in fact, how poorly the gender trinary paradigm ends up mapping onto the reality of my experience. Feminism has made a hash of the Maiden role and its broader social salience, to no one’s surprise, but it’s the Hero role that really fails to sync up with the world around me. It’s rooted in a vision of normative masculinity that just...doesn’t line up with what men actually do, or how men actually feel about themselves, at least within my field of vision. Maybe that’s an artifact of my living in a rarefied nerd-bubble where no one really cares about the conventional masculine ideal. Maybe it’s an artifact of modern society being different from earlier stages of society. Maybe it was just an illusion to begin with, fostered by consuming too much genre media. I dunno.
In any event -- the point is that this concept-suite will probably break if you put any weight on it. If you find yourself inclined to poke around at it with questions, I’m probably happy to field them, but don’t be surprised if they end up being grounded in “I found these ideas powerful when I was an alienated bookish teenager, and the resonance of it has never really gone away, as the resonances of such things generally don’t.”
OK then. Moving on.
What is the basic idea of the gender trinary?
There are three “genders” -- hero, maiden, and monster. These correspond to the roles in a primordial, mythic passion-play narrative.
As it is written:
The Monster, who is transgressive, lays a claim on the Maiden, who is desirable and pure. The Hero contests this claim, defeats the Monster, and saves the Maiden.
Rama / Sita / Ravana is probably the best example of the pure, uncomplicated version of that story from “authentic” mythology. Many gender-trinary-tangent myths either have a monster who isn’t remotely personlike in any way (Perseus / Andromeda / Cetus) or complicate the interaction to the point of near-unrecognizability (Gilgamesh / Shamhat / Enkidu).
Modern culture has provided us with a lot of very pure, very recognizable gender trinary instantiations. Mario / Peach / Bowser and Link / Zelda / Ganon are absolutely textbook. Modern culture has also provided us with a lot of trope deconstructions (Braid, Dr. Horrible).
Versions of this story with a focus on the Monster form the core of the gothic-romance trope suite. Beauty and the Beast and The Phantom of the Opera are foundational texts.
Are those roles really “genders,” though?
Well, to some extent.
The trinary paradigm is definitely an overlay on the male/female gender binary, not a replacement for it. In particular, while the Hero role is undeniably masculine in its construction, and the Maiden role is similarly feminine -- even if you allow for female Heroes (which I do, absolutely) and male Maidens (which I do, kinda) -- the Monster role doesn’t really have its own parallel suite of gender tropes. A Monster can embody either extreme masculinity or extreme femininity, in ways that work within those concept-suites rather than subverting them. There are classic extremely-monster-y monsters who code as hyper-men (King Kong, Beast) and ones who code as hyper-women (vampy succubi etc.). Monsters can also certainly be androgynous, or display traits that are off-the-gender-spectrum entirely...but that tends to come across as ambiguously gendered or un-gendered rather than distinctively third-gendered. This is particularly relevant when discussing romantic and sexual attraction, which tends to be plugged into a very low-level set of physical and behavioral cues in a way that isn’t amenable to being warped through high-level narrative abstraction. Saying, e.g., that Adam is “bisexual” because he is attracted to both Lilith (Monster) and Eve (Maiden) feels pretty dumb.
But genders come with gender roles. And, to a large extent, the point of the trinary is to create (or make explicit) a set of three different gender roles that are all legible to each other, that all have their own distinct boundaries, and that all cohere internally. There are important ways in which a hulking manly brute monster and a slinky witchy siren monster and a totally inhuman bug monster all expect to play the same role in the broader context of society, and all expect to engage with Heroes and with Maidens in basically similar ways. Certainly, if you use social narrative as a guide, there are important ways in which all of those Monsters can expect to have similar standards of success and to be perceiving their own identities in similar ways. (Or so I posit.) And once you’ve gotten that far, well, “gender” doesn’t seem like an inappropriate term.
Your mileage may vary.
Aesthetics
This is basically a place for me to point out that there isn’t a single iconic image for any of these roles.
Heroes, in the full flower of their Heroic physicality, can run the gamut from lithe twinky bishounen to jacked Spartan hoplites with huge beards. “Wispy pink-and-purple fairy princess” and “voluptuously sensual earth goddess” are both overwhelmingly Maiden looks.
Monsters, as suggested earlier, get even more of a range than that. Their appearance can exaggeratedly emphasize physical power (ogres) or exaggeratedly de-emphasize it (Jabba the Hutt). They can possess extreme masculine beauty (Dracula), extreme masculine ugliness (Lord Voldemort), extreme feminine beauty (succubi), or extreme feminine ugliness (night hags). The only real commonality to a “Monster look” is that it should be somehow wrong. Ugliness is wrong by default; inhumanity is obviously wrong by default; beauty must be cast as somehow sickly or unwholesome. You can have Monsters who don’t look particularly wrong (Dr. Horrible), but this makes them “less monstrous” in the way that physical traits can make someone “less masculine” or “less feminine.”
Associated Concepts
Or: “What do these words mean, anyway?” The part for which you’re all here.
Perhaps it is easiest to start by saying: the “point” of the Monster role (in some sense) is that it is unsocialized and transgressive, and what it gets for those costs is self-expression and freedom.
Both the Hero and the Maiden are, essentially and necessarily, socialized roles. To be a [successful] Hero or Maiden, you must be embedded in some kind of society; you must be bound to the ideals of that society; and the success of your gender performance is, in the end, a reflection of how well you can embody those ideals.
(“Society” can mean a lot of different things here, and it doesn’t have to be particularly big or expansive or civilization-y. In particular, when you’re talking about Heroes, a little mutually-reinforcing “band of brothers” is very definitely enough of a society to qualify.)
The Hero role is obviously very related to the “male gender role,” although it’s not identical. At its absolute most basic core, it is about having the competence to fight in defense of your society and your Maiden. This radiates out to “competence,” in most senses of the term -- especially most pragmatic senses -- being a Hero power concept. Heroes do useful things for others. They fix the car, pay the bills, save lives on the operating table, etc.
(Domestic labor isn’t particularly Hero-coded, because [for mostly dumb reasons] it doesn’t have tight narrative associations with competence. Cooking and cleaning are not things that you do because you’re stepping up when others can’t. But domestic labor also isn’t particularly Maiden-coded in this schema. It’s not really anything-coded.)
Competition is also very close to the heart of the Hero role. Heroes compete with each other, with Monsters, and with the obstacles presented by the uncaring universe. I assume this is a direct outgrowth of the competence thing; you continually test, and continually show off, your power by pitting it against forces that will resist.
The Maiden role is, to be honest, the least-fleshed-out in abstract terms. (Probably because I was never in any particular danger of being seen as, or of seeing myself as, a Maiden.) It has a lot to do with love and sex, unsurprisingly -- in a standard Feminism 101 “Women are the Sex Class” kind of way, physical and emotional intimacy are part of the Maiden concept-sphere. It has a lot to do with emotional and social power, with the ability to change what people are thinking and feeling by interacting with them.
It has a lot to do with inherent legitimacy. Maidens in good standing are always valid. (Heroes must prove their validity, at least once, probably over and over; Monsters are always invalid.) This gets tied up with a certain, uh, avatar-of-the-society’s-ideals-ness.
One ramification of all this is that leadership is a Maiden thing. Most forms of political and institutional leadership, at least, and also probably household leadership as well. Maidens are the ones who contain the highest values of the society within themselves, and therefore the ones who are properly helming the ship of state, telling others what to do; they’re the ones who are good enough with people to wield command. Often they act through Hero subordinates or champions.
A Hero being in charge, in this schema, means that something is somehow off -- he’s probably dominated by his own ego and love of victory, rather than having the best interests of the society at heart.
(Exceptions apply for fully Heroic sub-institutions like the military. But those are “supposed” to be subject to some kind of higher Maiden-controlled authority.)
Both the Hero role and the Maiden role come with a strong baked-in requirement of desirability. Heroes and Maidens are supposed to be beautiful, outwardly and inwardly. Occupying either role means that you are obliged to be appealing to members of the other role in a romantic/sexual sense, and to be appealing to the society-at-large in terms of embodying its ideals and meeting its needs. Failing to appeal is...well, a failure.
Monsters are driven by their own internal, asocial urges. They act contrary to the ideals and the needs of their societies. They are freed from the requirement to be desirable by being automatically anathemized.
Needless to say, of course, it is possible for Monsters to appeal -- romantically/sexually (as in gothic romances) or even on a broader cultural level (if a Monster is faddishly fetishized, for example). This is never [in the theoretical conceptual perfect-spherical-gender sense] because the Monster has fit itself into a template of desirability; it is because some other party has perceived the Monster’s idiosyncratic self-constructed identity, hidden or overt, and found it lovable. It is [in theory] always sui generis and always the fruit of a unique, un-ritualized interaction.
“Doesn’t fit into society” covers a lot of conceptual ground -- a lot more ground than “does fit into society.” Monster-hood manifests in many very-divergent forms, because there are so many ways to be different and taboo.
Alienation is pretty central to the role concept. Normatively monster attitudes range from “grumpy and desirous of being left alone” to “omnicidally angry.”
The role-syntonic (positive) Monster ways of being in love involve pedestalization, possessiveness, and focused obsession. It is important to distinguish the loved one from everyone else.
The Monster role is neither particularly active nor particularly passive. “Has a scheme to remake all reality and will stop at nothing to achieve it” is a very Monster deal. So is “sits in a cave, contemplating its own strange thoughts, and will never interact with any part of the world unless disturbed.”
The archetypical Monster is an egomaniacal monad, but for narrative purposes it’s possible for a Monster instead to be a foreigner -- to be beholden to the ideals and structures of a society, so long as it’s an alien one.
Gender Interactions in the Trinary Paradigm
It’s worth remembering that the quintessential gender trinary story is a struggle. In a high conceptual sense, it’s a struggle in which all three roles are thrown together to find out which two of them will pair off.
(In theory, I’m sure, you could end up with a balanced triad. But I don’t think we have good stories about how that would work or what it would look like. The dyadic nature of human reproduction has a lot of concept influence.)
The most common pairing, of course, is Hero/Maiden. The Monster is defeated -- we assume that its influence was generally a bad one, even if somewhere along the way it might have had some appeal -- and the pro-social lovers unite, bonded by their shared ideal.
Maiden/Monster is an essentially psychological pairing in most cases, driven by deep interpersonal communication that supersedes social expectations.
Hero/Monster is the least common pairing. Which is no surprise, because (as mentioned) Maiden is the role that’s associated with love and sex; the Hero and the Monster are fighting over the Maiden, in theory, and something weird has to happen to change that. But there are a few well-established narratives here. The often-bromantic-rather-than-romantic Gilgamesh/Enkidu story is one. There’s also the version in which the Monster is made very feminine and the Hero shifts to the center of the love triangle. This gets you a sort of gender-reversal of the Maiden/Monster pairing; the Maiden ends up being portrayed as shallow or bland, and the Monster provides a truer / spicier / more genuinely personal sort of love.
110 notes
·
View notes
Text
Tritrinary Pride Flag
Tritrinary or triternary: trigender trinary; experiencing three trinary genders; or having all ternary genders within one's life experience and culture.
#tritrinary#trigender#multitrinary#gender trinary#genders#mod ap.#prideflag#flags#pride flags#mogai#liom
16 notes
·
View notes
Text
jameela jamil really just has some awful takes its shocking
#ooc#tbd#transphobia tw#anything that insists enbies are stealing spots from women#and/or implies rigid gender trinary instead of a binary#is a fucking instant no
13 notes
·
View notes
Note
OC ask game: 15 for paragon, and maybe 20 if you feel it’s applicable?
(from this ask game)
Oh boy I hope you're prepared for a long 'un! I don't think I've talked openly about my special boy Paragon before, so the floodgates are open
15. How do they speak? Is what they say usually thought of on the spot, or do they rehearse it in their mind first?
Short answer: very reservedly, usually. When he's nervous or offended, it's stiff and formal in a way that the refugees find kind of pretentious, since it's a Courtly register (he doesn't mean to be pretentious, it's just how his speech was designed). Other times he's kind of a bitch- a result of being highly opinionated about people but not feeling like he's allowed to say so in so many words. He makes a point of picking up slang, idioms, and profanity as he goes, but beyond that it takes a long time before he feels really comfortable just saying what he actually thinks.
Longer answer under the cut:
Paragon is extremely aware of how he speaks as part of a performance. I wouldn't say that he's being fake, but the things he says are certainly studied. After all, he was created to play a specific role and uphold a particular image: The Gallant Knight, The Ideal Hero, the Perfect Human, an inspiration to all others (to sacrifice themselves for the Sovereignty). He's not allowed to make mistakes or give anyone a reason to question the propaganda he was made to embody. And while he's come to question the ideals behind the image he projects, he finds it much harder to come to grips with the idea that, like, y'know, he doesn't HAVE to embody any perfect ideal, he- and people in general- could just be, like, imperfect people. (He has a problem with pedestals.)
So he's very careful about how he speaks- when he's with the refugees that he comes to care for, he tries to speak deferentially, presenting himself first as a useful tool and then- when this turns out to be super weird and off-putting to the refugees- tries to model himself as a helpful community member. He's constantly monitoring his own words and actions and reactions, trying to make sure he comes off as useful, nonthreatening, and in no way at all weird or inhuman, which by the way is totally unnecessary because it's not even as if all or most of the people he's surrounded by even fit the definition of "human" as defined by the Sovereignty. This process ends up resulting in a lot of trial-and-error culture clash (and tragedy. It's fine though it works out it's only a major turning point in the narrative, don't worry about it) as he tries to get a handle on how this very mixed company of humans communicates and what they even consider polite or helpful, which is already a small anthropological nightmare even before the part where he's also trying not to reveal anything important about himself or what he thinks in return.
Anyway as you can guess, this charade doesn't work out very well XD Later in the story when Paragon has removed a few of his filters, we'll find that he's a fairly guileless and sometimes impulsive speaker- cause he has a remarkably quick temper and can be pretty reckless and impatient for a being made of stone and steel.
Oh yeah I did mention he's a fantasy robot with a ceramic mask for a face, didn't I? That's kind of a thing about him and his being the "perfect human" also.
#verso answers#paragon and the dragon#ilovedthestars#thank you for the ask stars <3 i'm so happy to be able to ramble about my special boy#question 20 is a great one also but it's fairly complicated and needs more worldbuilding than i've done#families work differently in their trinary gender system and i'm not sure that they make a 'romantic' attraction distinction
6 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
geulss
?
ragazzo-perduto92
Nutzlos auf dieser Welt
dr-maruki
CONNOR
chicawithoutfeelings
Chica sad
pctistrangler
My best friend Plank